DAOStewards Funding proposal

[Jengajojo]

@ernest_of_gaia

So if the DAO Stewards were managing other folks tokens in order to spread DAO influence and represent the DAO with whatever value holding tokens would be, that seems like a simple Treasury Department Workstream that could be created. And Funded through.

The treasury controls actual tokens, delegation/DAOstewards only holds voting power over said tokens. The delegator has sovereignty to undelegate at any time, but tokens in the treasury cannot be moved without the multi-sig signers.

@ernest_of_gaia

I would like to see the research on this. I would also like to first see the question of how to integrate the maintenance of reviewing the constitution and operations associated with modifying the constitution?

I agree

@ernest_of_gaia

If this is not an effective discord space by all means lets get active in this area of discord and update our communication channels. Creating new segregated channels will only continue this pattern and will not resolve the real issue, which is the folks always wanting this work to be done are just not informed of how to use discord well. Or you would already be active in those channels.

In my opinion, the problem is not that folks don’t know how to use discord. When folks really want to get into coordinape, or pick up a bounty, they figure it out. The problem is that governance is everyone’s responsibility, thus in practise it becomes no one’s responsibility.

@ernest_of_gaia

Also we are talking dao operations, what are we paying the operations department for if not to handle operaional processes like updating core infrastructure. ie, changing the constitution. Are they not planning a budget for that work?

If that were true, then the changes mentioned in the last two BDIPs would be reflected in the constitution on github, but that is not true. If OPS had ownership over governance then we wouldn’t have loop holes in our governance such as who evaluates and implements GSE recommendations, or who updated constitution etc…